Quote Originally Posted by Roger Hicks View Post
The penalties for modest overexposure (1-2 stops) with negative films are small: reduced sharpness, and (with silver B+W) bigger grain. Neither really matters much, once you're using anything bigger than 35mm, and even with 35mm, they're hardly disastrous.

It really isn't difficult to learn to give more than adequate exposures for negatives, using just guesswork, especially if you err always on the side of over-exposure. But if you have time to take a reading, or if it's a difficult subject, why not use a meter?

There's a distressing tendency towards absolutism among photographers: MY WAY IS THE ONLY WAY. No, it isn't. Use what works, and what you're comfortable with. But don't try to impose it on everyone else, especially if you are shaky on the underlying theory (as most absolutists are).

Cheers,

R.
Well said. The American Indians made canoes out of available materials; if epoxy and fiberglass had been available to them they'd have used it.
Being able to estimate exposure is a good skill to have, for when you've forgotten the meter, broken the meter, or the meter has dead batteries. It is not a substitute for a meter, any more than birchbark is a substitute for fiberglass.